OrthodoxChristianity.net
December 22, 2014, 01:00:17 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 »  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Ethiopian Orthodox and the Immaculate Conception  (Read 28629 times) Average Rating: 5
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Salpy
Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Armenian Church
Posts: 12,896


Pray for the Christians of Iraq and Syria.


« Reply #45 on: October 31, 2009, 02:35:04 AM »

Get well soon!  Lord have mercy on Mina.
Logged

Salpy
Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Armenian Church
Posts: 12,896


Pray for the Christians of Iraq and Syria.


« Reply #46 on: November 06, 2009, 12:32:37 AM »

In regards to Our Lady's nature: does our EOTC Church teach the same doctrine as all other non-Chalcedonian Churches regarding her being born without original sin?

In the book Welcome to the Armenian Church, published by the Eastern Diocese of the Armenian Church in America in 2004, it states that the teaching that the Virgin Mary "is considered to have been conceived immaculately without sin" is not a teaching of the Armenian Church. (page 39)

http://www.stvartanbookstore.com/index.asp?PageAction=VIEWPROD&ProdID=5247

Another source which confirms this is an article about the Mother of God on the website of the Armenian Eastern Diocese:

http://www.armenianchurch.net/worship/mary/index.html


In the 5th century, at the holy Ecumenical Council of Ephesus, the Holy Mother's position as "Mother of God" and "Bearer of God" (Asdvadzamayr-Asdvadzadzin) was doctrinally established.  Only those aspects of St. Mary's life which are directly related to Christ are mentioned in the Holy Gospels.  The remainder of her biography is attributed to tradition, which is found in much of the most ancient of ecclesiastical literature.

St. Mary was the daughter of Joachim and Anna of Nazareth (originally Bethlehem).  Anna, being barren, prayed and made special vows for a child.  She then had her only child, a daughter named Mariam (or Mary).  Although Mary was born naturally (having both a father and mother) she is considered morally pure and immaculate.  It is for this reason that the church not only celebrates her birth but also her conception, which the Armenian and the Greek Orthodox churches celebrate on December 9th and the Roman Catholic church celebrates on the 8th.

The concept of her being morally immaculate later developed into the question of her Immaculate Conception (from Anna), a doctrine adopted by the Roman Catholic Church in 1854.  The Armenian Church, on the other hand, does not accept this, as it attributes to Mary that which belongs only to Christ; only Christ was immaculately conceived.  Yet, her purity is unquestioned.  According to the teaching of the Armenian Church, at the time of the Annunciation when the Holy Spirit entered her she was cleansed of all sin (original sin) as she was to be the vessel in which God manifest was to be incarnated.

After the Ascension of her divine son, the remainder of Mary's life comes to us through tradition.  It states she lived out the rest of her days in Jerusalem, cared for by St. John the Evangelist.  She died in Jerusalem some 15 years after Christ's Ascension and was buried in her family tomb in Gethsemane.

After she passed away, all the apostles -- save Bartholomew who was absent at that time -- conducted her funeral with great ceremony at a cave-like tomb in the Garden of Gethsemane.  Later, St. Bartholomew returned and wished to see Mary one last time.  He convinced the Apostles to open the tomb.

Upon opening the tomb, they could not find her body.  Angels' voices were heard for three days and nights.  They interpreted the angels' singing as a sign that our Lord had assumed (taken up) His Mother into heaven as He had promised her.  They found the empty tomb a confirmation of that promise for she had not been dead but had fallen asleep.  For this reason, the church refers to the end of her earthly life as "the dormition" rather than "death."

 


Logged

Gebre Menfes Kidus
"SERVANT of The HOLY SPIRIT"
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Ethiopian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Tewahedo / Non-Chalcedonian
Posts: 8,495


"Lord Have Mercy on Me a Sinner!"


WWW
« Reply #47 on: November 06, 2009, 01:40:32 AM »

In regards to Our Lady's nature: does our EOTC Church teach the same doctrine as all other non-Chalcedonian Churches regarding her being born without original sin?

In the book Welcome to the Armenian Church, published by the Eastern Diocese of the Armenian Church in America in 2004, it states that the teaching that the Virgin Mary "is considered to have been conceived immaculately without sin" is not a teaching of the Armenian Church. (page 39)

http://www.stvartanbookstore.com/index.asp?PageAction=VIEWPROD&ProdID=5247

Another source which confirms this is an article about the Mother of God on the website of the Armenian Eastern Diocese:

http://www.armenianchurch.net/worship/mary/index.html


In the 5th century, at the holy Ecumenical Council of Ephesus, the Holy Mother's position as "Mother of God" and "Bearer of God" (Asdvadzamayr-Asdvadzadzin) was doctrinally established.  Only those aspects of St. Mary's life which are directly related to Christ are mentioned in the Holy Gospels.  The remainder of her biography is attributed to tradition, which is found in much of the most ancient of ecclesiastical literature.

St. Mary was the daughter of Joachim and Anna of Nazareth (originally Bethlehem).  Anna, being barren, prayed and made special vows for a child.  She then had her only child, a daughter named Mariam (or Mary).  Although Mary was born naturally (having both a father and mother) she is considered morally pure and immaculate.  It is for this reason that the church not only celebrates her birth but also her conception, which the Armenian and the Greek Orthodox churches celebrate on December 9th and the Roman Catholic church celebrates on the 8th.

The concept of her being morally immaculate later developed into the question of her Immaculate Conception (from Anna), a doctrine adopted by the Roman Catholic Church in 1854.  The Armenian Church, on the other hand, does not accept this, as it attributes to Mary that which belongs only to Christ; only Christ was immaculately conceived.  Yet, her purity is unquestioned.  According to the teaching of the Armenian Church, at the time of the Annunciation when the Holy Spirit entered her she was cleansed of all sin (original sin) as she was to be the vessel in which God manifest was to be incarnated.

After the Ascension of her divine son, the remainder of Mary's life comes to us through tradition.  It states she lived out the rest of her days in Jerusalem, cared for by St. John the Evangelist.  She died in Jerusalem some 15 years after Christ's Ascension and was buried in her family tomb in Gethsemane.

After she passed away, all the apostles -- save Bartholomew who was absent at that time -- conducted her funeral with great ceremony at a cave-like tomb in the Garden of Gethsemane.  Later, St. Bartholomew returned and wished to see Mary one last time.  He convinced the Apostles to open the tomb.

Upon opening the tomb, they could not find her body.  Angels' voices were heard for three days and nights.  They interpreted the angels' singing as a sign that our Lord had assumed (taken up) His Mother into heaven as He had promised her.  They found the empty tomb a confirmation of that promise for she had not been dead but had fallen asleep.  For this reason, the church refers to the end of her earthly life as "the dormition" rather than "death."

 




Thank you Salpy.

For clarification, does the Church teach that Mariam did not die, or that she died a natural death and then was taken up to heaven?

Also, where do we find this promise: They interpreted the angels' singing as a sign that our Lord had assumed (taken up) His Mother into heaven as He had promised her.? Not doubting it at all, just want to be able to answer Protestants who ask me.

Thanks again.


Selam
Logged

"There are two great tragedies: one is to live a life ruled by the passions, and the other is to live a passionless life."
Selam, +GMK+
Salpy
Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Armenian Church
Posts: 12,896


Pray for the Christians of Iraq and Syria.


« Reply #48 on: November 06, 2009, 01:49:05 AM »

Thank you Salpy.

For clarification, does the Church teach that Mariam did not die, or that she died a natural death and then was taken up to heaven?

Also, where do we find this promise: They interpreted the angels' singing as a sign that our Lord had assumed (taken up) His Mother into heaven as He had promised her.? Not doubting it at all, just want to be able to answer Protestants who ask me.

Thanks again.


Selam

I'm not sure what the source of the tradition is.  It's my understanding, however, that she died and was buried, but that her body was taken up into heaven.  I assume that is what the article means by saying she wasn't dead.
Logged

Gebre Menfes Kidus
"SERVANT of The HOLY SPIRIT"
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Ethiopian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Tewahedo / Non-Chalcedonian
Posts: 8,495


"Lord Have Mercy on Me a Sinner!"


WWW
« Reply #49 on: November 06, 2009, 01:54:22 AM »

Thank you Salpy.

For clarification, does the Church teach that Mariam did not die, or that she died a natural death and then was taken up to heaven?

Also, where do we find this promise: They interpreted the angels' singing as a sign that our Lord had assumed (taken up) His Mother into heaven as He had promised her.? Not doubting it at all, just want to be able to answer Protestants who ask me.

Thanks again.


Selam

I'm not sure what the source of the tradition is.  It's my understanding, however, that she died and was buried, but that her body was taken up into heaven.  I assume that is what the article means by saying she wasn't dead.

Just wondering if there was a Scriptural reference where Our Lord promised that she would be assumed to heaven. I can't think of any off the top of my head. Maybe there is an OT prophecy similar to the prophecy of her perpetual virginity in Ezekiel 44:2?

Anyone know?

Selam
Logged

"There are two great tragedies: one is to live a life ruled by the passions, and the other is to live a passionless life."
Selam, +GMK+
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #50 on: November 07, 2009, 09:45:35 PM »


Just reading through this thread and I have a question. Do the EO and OO Churches believe that in order to be human one cannot be free of ancestral sin?

No. The indwelling of the Holy Spirit effected at Pentecost and later by Chrismation results in redemption from ancestral sin. Adam and Eve did not originally have ancestral sin, and our state resulting from participation in Christ does not include ancestral sin.
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #51 on: November 07, 2009, 09:52:26 PM »

Just reading through this thread and I have a question. Do the EO and OO Churches believe that in order to be human one cannot be free of ancestral sin?

Well, when we got baptized we didn't stop being human  Wink
Then why do some argue that if Mary was free from original sin then she wouldn't be human?

Well, it simply puts her in a place where she is inherently different from the rest of us. The doctrine of the Immaculate Conception does not so much teach that Mary was freed from something that she actually at one point experienced, but that she was protected from ever experiencing ancestral sin. Such a notion not only places her in a state totally different from the rest of us, but it doesn't even appear to have been accomplished in a natural way as with Christ. When we ask the question "why did Christ not inherit ancestral sin?", the answer is a matter of nature. Christ did not inherit ancestral sin because he is fully divine, He has always been a Spirit-bearer, and cannot cease to ever be a Spirit-bearer because He is divine. Thus, simply the Word being divine is the very reality that prevented Him from inheriting ancestral sin when He became human. Mary, on the other hand, does not appear to have lacked ancestral sin as a natural matter, but because God intervened in her conception and miraculously prevented her from inheriting it. This lack of her experiencing the state of those she directly took flesh from with nothing to naturally prevent it is the main reason why the Immaculate Conception seems to us to make Mary a stranger.
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
Hiywot
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahido
Posts: 149


« Reply #52 on: November 20, 2009, 08:18:56 AM »

This is a reply to the PM I received requesting me to explain whether the majority of Tewahido believers accept the fact that the Mother of God is free from original sin.

Here, in Ethiopia, almost all of Tewahido believers accept the official position of the Holy Synod of the Tewahido church which says that the Blessed Virgin Mary is free from original sin. This official position is indicated in the Holy Synod’s published document titled “The Doctrine and Foreign Relations of the EOTC”. This document has boldly asserted that the Tewahido church believes that the Blessed Virgin Mary, Mother of God, is free from original sin.

In Addis Ababa and in all the regions of Ethiopia that I have been so far, I have never heard of a bishop or a priest or a Tewahido preacher doubting this position. But, of course, as I have mentioned in my earlier post there are very few individuals who question this position. I believe that these individuals are entitled to their own position and that they should not try to present their arguments as the official position of the EOTC. What we do mind is the official position of our church and NOT what individuals write in their personal articles or dissertations or whatever.

Therefore, we believe that our Blessed Virgin Mother Mary, Mother of God is free from original sin and that St. Gabriel was sent to Her NOT to cleanse Her from original sin BUT to tell Her the good news.  St. Gabriel himself has referred to Her as “full of grace”. Nobody else was referred to as full of grace since the fall of Adam simply because original sin had rendered humanity sinner and devoid of grace. But our Blessed Virgin Mother Mary was born full of grace and free from original sin.

After all, She is the Mother of God.

Regards,

Hiywot
Logged
Aidan
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 126



« Reply #53 on: November 21, 2009, 03:01:00 PM »

In the prayerbook published by the Holy Transfiguration Monastery, Boston there is a prayer by 'Paul, a monk of the Monastery of the Benefactress' that opens like this;

O spotless, undefiled, incorrupt, immaculate, pure Virgin, Lady Bride of God.....

Now, as I understand it, immaculate does not in this case mean conceived immaculate, i.e. without the taint of ancestral sin. The arguement goes, if Mary, why not the rest of our race?

Does the Ethiopian stance mean immaculate in the exact Roman Catholic or immaculate in the Eastern Orthodox sense. It seems to be the former according to the former poster or is their another interpretation?
Logged
Gebre Menfes Kidus
"SERVANT of The HOLY SPIRIT"
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Ethiopian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Tewahedo / Non-Chalcedonian
Posts: 8,495


"Lord Have Mercy on Me a Sinner!"


WWW
« Reply #54 on: November 22, 2009, 02:53:40 AM »

I must confess that I am still unclear about my Church's teaching on this matter. (This is due my lack of understanding I'm sure.) But it would be helpful if someone could make a shorter and clearer statement. I apologize to all my EOTC brothers who have already posted, but I still don't quite understand.

Here is what I think I understand so far:

Our Church does not teach the dogma of Our Lady's Immaculate Conception; but our Church does teach that Mariyam did not sin and was perpetually pure throughout her life. She was free from original sin because she chose of her own free will not to sin, not because she was divinely insulated from the ability to sin. This is the distinction: the Catholic dogma of Immaculate Conception means that Our Lady could not have sinned; but the EOTC position is that she could have sinned but chose not to, thus she remained free from original sin.

I may be completely wrong. If so, I hope someone will explain this issue further. Please forgive my ignorance.

Thank you.

Selam
« Last Edit: November 22, 2009, 02:54:19 AM by Gebre Menfes Kidus » Logged

"There are two great tragedies: one is to live a life ruled by the passions, and the other is to live a passionless life."
Selam, +GMK+
Hiywot
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahido
Posts: 149


« Reply #55 on: December 01, 2009, 07:51:41 AM »

Gebre Menfes Kidus,

Sorry for my very late response.

Our church, the EOTC, believes that Our Lady Mariam was born free from tinte abiso (original sin) and this, by no means, affects Her free will.

Hiywot
Logged
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,417


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #56 on: December 01, 2009, 05:17:12 PM »

I must confess that I am still unclear about my Church's teaching on this matter. (This is due my lack of understanding I'm sure.) But it would be helpful if someone could make a shorter and clearer statement. I apologize to all my EOTC brothers who have already posted, but I still don't quite understand.

Here is what I think I understand so far:

Our Church does not teach the dogma of Our Lady's Immaculate Conception; but our Church does teach that Mariyam did not sin and was perpetually pure throughout her life. She was free from original sin because she chose of her own free will not to sin, not because she was divinely insulated from the ability to sin. This is the distinction: the Catholic dogma of Immaculate Conception means that Our Lady could not have sinned; but the EOTC position is that she could have sinned but chose not to, thus she remained free from original sin.

I may be completely wrong. If so, I hope someone will explain this issue further. Please forgive my ignorance.

Thank you.

Selam
Actually the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception does not mean that Mary could not have sinned. It does mean that she was created like Adam and Eve who did not possess the strong inclination towards sin before the fall. However, as we see, even those created immaculately like Adam and Eve can still choose to sin.
Logged

You are right. I apologize for having sacked Constantinople. I really need to stop doing that.
Hiywot
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahido
Posts: 149


« Reply #57 on: December 04, 2009, 10:16:35 AM »

Thank you Salpy.

For clarification, does the Church teach that Mariam did not die, or that she died a natural death and then was taken up to heaven?

Also, where do we find this promise: They interpreted the angels' singing as a sign that our Lord had assumed (taken up) His Mother into heaven as He had promised her.? Not doubting it at all, just want to be able to answer Protestants who ask me.

Thanks again.


Selam

I'm not sure what the source of the tradition is.  It's my understanding, however, that she died and was buried, but that her body was taken up into heaven.  I assume that is what the article means by saying she wasn't dead.

Just wondering if there was a Scriptural reference where Our Lord promised that she would be assumed to heaven. I can't think of any off the top of my head. Maybe there is an OT prophecy similar to the prophecy of her perpetual virginity in Ezekiel 44:2?

Anyone know?

Selam

When we teach about the assumption of Our Lady Mariam, we usually refer to the following two bible quotes of prophesy as the basis.

The first quote: “Rise up, O Lord, into thy rest; thou, and the Ark of thy strength” (Psalm 132:8 ). Truly, Christ is gone up into the holy resting place. David said, "Rise up" for He arose from the dead, and ascended into heaven. And David said the same to the Lord’s true Ark of the Covenant, for She also arose from the dead.

The second quote: “Arise, my darling; My beautiful one, come away with me!... from the clefts of the rock and the hiding places of the mountain crags…” Song 2:10-14.


(Edited to fix a glitch that caused a smiley to appear at the end of the Psalm citation--Salpy)
« Last Edit: December 04, 2009, 12:03:34 PM by Salpy » Logged
Gebre Menfes Kidus
"SERVANT of The HOLY SPIRIT"
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Ethiopian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Tewahedo / Non-Chalcedonian
Posts: 8,495


"Lord Have Mercy on Me a Sinner!"


WWW
« Reply #58 on: December 05, 2009, 12:31:31 AM »

Thank you Salpy.

For clarification, does the Church teach that Mariam did not die, or that she died a natural death and then was taken up to heaven?

Also, where do we find this promise: They interpreted the angels' singing as a sign that our Lord had assumed (taken up) His Mother into heaven as He had promised her.? Not doubting it at all, just want to be able to answer Protestants who ask me.

Thanks again.


Selam

I'm not sure what the source of the tradition is.  It's my understanding, however, that she died and was buried, but that her body was taken up into heaven.  I assume that is what the article means by saying she wasn't dead.

Just wondering if there was a Scriptural reference where Our Lord promised that she would be assumed to heaven. I can't think of any off the top of my head. Maybe there is an OT prophecy similar to the prophecy of her perpetual virginity in Ezekiel 44:2?

Anyone know?

Selam

When we teach about the assumption of Our Lady Mariam, we usually refer to the following two bible quotes of prophesy as the basis.

The first quote: “Rise up, O Lord, into thy rest; thou, and the Ark of thy strength” (Psalm 132:8 ). Truly, Christ is gone up into the holy resting place. David said, "Rise up" for He arose from the dead, and ascended into heaven. And David said the same to the Lord’s true Ark of the Covenant, for She also arose from the dead.

The second quote: “Arise, my darling; My beautiful one, come away with me!... from the clefts of the rock and the hiding places of the mountain crags…” Song 2:10-14.


(Edited to fix a glitch that caused a smiley to appear at the end of the Psalm citation--Salpy)

That's beautiful Hiywot! Thank you.


Selam
Logged

"There are two great tragedies: one is to live a life ruled by the passions, and the other is to live a passionless life."
Selam, +GMK+
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 12,976


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


« Reply #59 on: December 05, 2009, 02:48:59 AM »

Gebre Menfes Kidus,

Sorry for my very late response.

Our church, the EOTC, believes that Our Lady Mariam was born free from tinte abiso (original sin) and this, by no means, affects Her free will.

Hiywot

So this is a prevalent belief even though your patriarch rejects it?
Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for "unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain." (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
Hiywot
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahido
Posts: 149


« Reply #60 on: December 07, 2009, 07:18:15 AM »

minasoliman,

The Patriarch has never officially rejected this belief.

Hiywot
Logged
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 12,976


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


« Reply #61 on: December 07, 2009, 12:23:36 PM »

minasoliman,

The Patriarch has never officially rejected this belief.

Hiywot

I guess this begs the question, that since there seems to be differences of opinion on this matter, why didn't HH Abune Paulos answer the plea of the excommunicated priest who rejected the Immaculate Conception, and instead having to involved Eritrean and Coptic clergy?  This interference across diocesan or local church lines without involving someone from the Ethiopian sides worries me that this may anger HH Abune Paulos and cause division yet again, even if he may agree with our church.
Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for "unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain." (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
Hiywot
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahido
Posts: 149


« Reply #62 on: December 08, 2009, 08:01:59 AM »

minasoliman,

The Patriarch has never officially rejected this belief.

Hiywot

I guess this begs the question, that since there seems to be differences of opinion on this matter, why didn't HH Abune Paulos answer the plea of the excommunicated priest who rejected the Immaculate Conception, and instead having to involved Eritrean and Coptic clergy?  This interference across diocesan or local church lines without involving someone from the Ethiopian sides worries me that this may anger HH Abune Paulos and cause division yet again, even if he may agree with our church.


Minasoliman, the only thing I can say is that I do share your concern.

Hiywot
Logged
BoredMeeting
Loving the Life of a Council Member
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic Christian
Jurisdiction: Serbian Orthodox/OCA
Posts: 722



« Reply #63 on: December 08, 2009, 04:26:36 PM »

I have to say that I'm finding this thread difficult to follow!

From the first page, I understood that the Ethiopian Church shared the Eastern Orthodox view of 'ancestral stain' instead of the Western idea of 'original sin', meaning the dogma of Immaculate Conception was irrelevant.

They also share the view of the Eastern Orthodox that Mary was free of all intentional sin.

But the last several posts seem to go against that and suggest that they embrace the Roman Catholic innovation.

As I said, very difficult to follow.
Logged
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 12,976


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


« Reply #64 on: December 08, 2009, 04:42:18 PM »

To be quite frank, the topic of Original Sin to me is a game on semantics.  Nevertheless, in the tradition of the OO Church, we follow quite strictly the language of Soteriology used by St. Athanasius, which was repeated by St. Cyril and St. Severus.

http://erkohet.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=103:blazingdartsfromtheorient&catid=46:smnufathersgeneral&Itemid=17#Anthropology

So when you see terminology like "Original Sin" used by us, know in the context it refers to a fall from grace, not an actual sin or guilt transmitted from one generation to the next.

God bless.
« Last Edit: December 08, 2009, 04:44:31 PM by minasoliman » Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for "unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain." (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
Gebre Menfes Kidus
"SERVANT of The HOLY SPIRIT"
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Ethiopian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Tewahedo / Non-Chalcedonian
Posts: 8,495


"Lord Have Mercy on Me a Sinner!"


WWW
« Reply #65 on: December 09, 2009, 06:43:59 AM »

I have to say that I'm finding this thread difficult to follow!

Me too. Embarrassed

Selam
Logged

"There are two great tragedies: one is to live a life ruled by the passions, and the other is to live a passionless life."
Selam, +GMK+
BoredMeeting
Loving the Life of a Council Member
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic Christian
Jurisdiction: Serbian Orthodox/OCA
Posts: 722



« Reply #66 on: December 09, 2009, 10:41:53 AM »

I have to say that I'm finding this thread difficult to follow!
Me too. Embarrassed

Selam
I believe that minasoliman's response may have answered it for me, though.
Logged
rakovsky
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Posts: 4,766



WWW
« Reply #67 on: March 25, 2010, 01:23:23 AM »

HIYWOT,

You wrote about Psalm 132:

Quote
“Rise up, O Lord, into thy rest; thou, and the Ark of thy strength” (Psalm 132:8 ). Truly, Christ is gone up into the holy resting place. David said, "Rise up" for He[Christ] arose from the dead, and ascended into heaven. And David said the same to the Lord’s true Ark of the Covenant, for She also arose from the dead.

In Psalm 132, David says he will not sleep:
5 Until I find out a place for the LORD, an habitation for the mighty God of Jacob. 
6 Lo, we heard of it at Ephratah: we found it in the fields of the wood.
7 We will go into his tabernacles: we will worship at his footstool.
8 Arise, O LORD, into thy rest; thou, and the ark of thy strength.
9 Let thy priests be clothed with righteousness; and let thy saints shout for joy.


Tabernacle means "dwelling place"
In Psalm 132, does the Lord's resting place refer to his dwelling place, the tabernacle? In what sense would the Lord rise to it?

Logged
Hiywot
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahido
Posts: 149


« Reply #68 on: March 25, 2010, 04:59:25 AM »

HIYWOT,

You wrote about Psalm 132:
Quote
“Rise up, O Lord, into thy rest; thou, and the Ark of thy strength” (Psalm 132:8 ). Truly, Christ is gone up into the holy resting place. David said, "Rise up" for He[Christ] arose from the dead, and ascended into heaven. And David said the same to the Lord’s true Ark of the Covenant, for She also arose from the dead.

In Psalm 132, David says he will not sleep:
5 Until I find out a place for the LORD, an habitation for the mighty God of Jacob. 
6 Lo, we heard of it at Ephratah: we found it in the fields of the wood.
7 We will go into his tabernacles: we will worship at his footstool.
8 Arise, O LORD, into thy rest; thou, and the ark of thy strength.
9 Let thy priests be clothed with righteousness; and let thy saints shout for joy.


Tabernacle means "dwelling place"
In Psalm 132, does the Lord's resting place refer to his dwelling place, the tabernacle? In what sense would the Lord rise to it?

rakovsky,

We believe that Psalms 132:8 is a prophetic verse telling the resurrection of Jesus Christ to heaven.
In its raw reading, as we call it, David built a sanctuary for the Lord and is praying that He come and dwell in that sanctuary or tabernacle as you said. For us that is simply the "raw reading".
Logged
Father Peter
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: British Orthodox Church within the Coptic Orthodox Patriarchate
Posts: 2,658



WWW
« Reply #69 on: March 25, 2010, 08:14:13 AM »

To be quite frank, the topic of Original Sin to me is a game on semantics.  Nevertheless, in the tradition of the OO Church, we follow quite strictly the language of Soteriology used by St. Athanasius, which was repeated by St. Cyril and St. Severus.

http://erkohet.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=103:blazingdartsfromtheorient&catid=46:smnufathersgeneral&Itemid=17#Anthropology

So when you see terminology like "Original Sin" used by us, know in the context it refers to a fall from grace, not an actual sin or guilt transmitted from one generation to the next.

I have to say that there seems to be a whole heap of confusion introduced when OO folk use terms which have a different and formal theological meaning in the Western theological tradition. Not only the use of the term Original Sin, but also Immaculate Conception. I have had several discussions with folk who can show that priests and bishops have used the terms in English language materials, but they are almost always speaking about something other than those terms formally mean.

Father Peter
Logged

Lord have mercy upon me a sinner
http://www.orthodoxmedway.org

My blog - http://anorthodoxpriest.blogspot.co.uk

The poster formerly known as peterfarrington
Azul
Moderated
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Român Ortodox
Jurisdiction: Eastern Orthodox
Posts: 988



« Reply #70 on: March 25, 2010, 10:31:36 AM »

edit
« Last Edit: March 25, 2010, 10:35:32 AM by Azul » Logged

Every formula of every religion has in this age of reason, to submit to the acid test of reason and universal assent.
Mahatma Gandhi
Ioannes
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 175


The end is now.


WWW
« Reply #71 on: October 06, 2010, 11:06:10 PM »

I have lived in Ethiopia, my wife is Ethiopian and I know much about the Ethiopian Tewahedo Church. I state on behalf of the Ethiopian Orthodox church, we do not believe in the emmaculate conception. If any priest or bishop states that we do, then he is something similar to the Eastern Orthodox's Eusebius Stephanou.
Logged
Ghazar
Byzantine Armenian Christian
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 215


"Ghazaros, toors yegoor:" "Lazarus, come forth."


WWW
« Reply #72 on: December 16, 2010, 05:52:09 PM »

In regards to Our Lady's nature: does our EOTC Church teach the same doctrine as all other non-Chalcedonian Churches regarding her being born without original sin?

In the book Welcome to the Armenian Church, published by the Eastern Diocese of the Armenian Church in America in 2004, it states that the teaching that the Virgin Mary "is considered to have been conceived immaculately without sin" is not a teaching of the Armenian Church. (page 39)

http://www.stvartanbookstore.com/index.asp?PageAction=VIEWPROD&ProdID=5247

Dear Sister in Christ, Salpy:

There are a lot of contradictory statements made by those who just want to paint with broad strokes and sweeping generalizations.  I offer the following quotes from Armenian Orthodox sources to serve as a balance to the one above.  I myself did a study on this question which discusses the similarities and differences between Catholics and Orthodox and tries to get at the real difference between us.

In the book "The Mother of God," by the Armenian Apostolic Vartabed Vatche Iknadiossian, he states, "the dogma of the Immaculate Conception, officially proclaimed by the Roman Catholic Church in 1854, was not officially proclaimed by our Church. Nevertheless we celebrate it as a very great feast, on 9th December (instead of 8th).  During the feast we find the following hymns:
 
"Thou art the Flower which cannot wither,

Thy birth was free from the condemnation of original sin,

Immaculate, holy Virgin, We glorify thee!"

"Living Eden. Tree of immortal life

guarded on every way by the flashing sword."

"Thanks to thy stainless and spotless purity, Thou art good!

Thanks to thine immaculate holiness thou art a Tutelary Advocate!"

-composed by St. Gregory of Narek, AD 951-1003

 

When asked about the Roman Catholic devotion: the Rosary, Fr. Iknadiossian gave this prayer of St. Gregory of Narek as an Armenian example of Marian devotion:

 

"Help me with thy winged prayers,

O thou who art proclaimed Mother of the living,

So that when I leave this earthly valley

I may without suffering walk towards thy dwelling of life which was

prepared for us.

So that the end of my life be lightened,

although t’was enburdened with iniquity.

Transform for me my day of anguish into a joyous feast.

O Thou who curest Eve’s pains!

With thy tears help me, for I am in distress,

O Thou, blessed amongst women.

Bend the knee to secure my reconciliation,

O Thou Mother of God."

(Excerpts from "The Mother of God, p.51-54)

 

Even in our "Book of Hours of the Armenian Apostolic Orthodox Church" it speaks of St. Mary’s Conception in relative terms in the Matins service on the day of the weak the Eastern Churches set aside to honor the Theotokos (Wednesday):

 

"Of the virgin of old, Mother Eve,

through whom old Adam became a debtor,

the grievous curse was lifted

by thine holy birth, O virgin Mary;

pray to thine only-begotten

to forgive the sins of their children;

sing praises to the fruit of the Virgin,

in whom ye were blessed, O generations of the earth-born."

 

Lastly in the forward of the above mentioned book the forward by Archbishop Torkom Manoogian, Armenian Partiarch of Jerusalem, states:  "The name of Mary, the Virgin of the Immaculate Conception who bore the Christ, will be honoured throughout eternity, as the quintessence of purity, innocence, sacrifice and devotion. No other human being has ever received, or been worthy of such vereration as this humble woman, so full of grace, from Galilee." (ibid. p. 7).

 
So I think this is important information that our people need to know.  Otherwise we run the risk of bearing false witness against our Latin brethren and perhaps even against our own Fathers. 

If interested in my study see:  The Conception of the Holy Virgin Mariam, Mother of God
http://www.looys.net/tradition.html

Sub-Dn. Ghazar

 
Trusting in Christ's 1st and 2nd Advent,
Rev. Sub-Deacon Lazarus W. Der-Ghazarian,
Holy Apostolic Orthodox Church of Armenia, Eastern Diocese USA
The Armenian Orthodox Evangelization Mission: www.looys.net
Logged

Trusting in Christ's Inextinguishable Light,
Rev. Sub-Deacon Lazarus Der-Ghazarian,
Byzantine Catholic Church, Eparchy of Parma
St. Gregory the Illuminator Institute:
www.looys.net
HabteSelassie
Ises and I-ity
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church
Posts: 3,332



« Reply #73 on: December 16, 2010, 06:43:16 PM »

Greetings in that Divine and Most Precious Name of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ!

In fact I don't doubt of Pope Shenouda's position (he's indeed a great man of God). I only guess that some elements in the liturgy of the Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahido Church might be easily misunderstood or misrepresented, especially in a diaspora setting where words in translation might be affected by a RC approach.

My Father-Confessor came here California from Kansas City in the backlash from this controversy in 2005.  While I am spilling the beans a bit, I thought it was relevant here, that a lot of the controversy over Immaculate Conception, in particular the Kansas City event, is not necessarily even over this issue, but rather is part of the schism between His Holiness Abune Paulos and His Holiness Abune Merkerios and the division amongst Ethiopian expatriates and exiles and Ethiopians in the mother land.  

In Kansas City, the priest who was excommunicated and dismissed was not dismissed over Mariolatry but rather in controversies in over recognition of His Holiness Abune Paulos.  Many Tewahedo parishes here in the US and Europe have been torn apart by this issue.  In Kansas City, that particular parish also broke apart over this issue,  split between the two needlessly opposing camps.  My priest today ended up here after leaving over all the division, it got pretty ugly over there Sad

In truth, neither the Tewahedo parishes here in the US (under His Holiness Abune Merkeriors) or the Tewahedo parishes in Ethiopia directly teach Mariolatry, and all publicly reject the doctrines of Immaculate Conception.  Ethiopians themselves picked this up from the Jesuits who forced fed it to them along with Roman supremacy and the Two Natures and others divisive issues, exploiting the fact that Ethiopia itself had their own several indigenous feuding camps over this issues for centuries.  In fact these were not fully resolved until Janhoy Atse Yohannes IV settled the matter at the unifying Ecumenical Council in 1878 which established the "Tewahedo" doctrines of the Ethiopian Orthodox Church, unifying all divisions and elucidating properly what it is to be Ethiopian Orthodox.

Those who are with HH Abune Paulos slander against Ethiopian expatriates accusing them wrongly of Mariolatry, and the expatriates also accuse HH Abune Paulos of instating Mariolatry nation-wide in Ethiopia.  Both claims or blatantly false, and I could not find it on my new computer hard drive, but HH Abune Paulos issued a doctrinal statement a few years ago to settle this matter officially and to declare the the Synod in Addis Ababa does not in fact recognize the Roman doctrine of Immaculate Conception.

His Holiness Patriarch Abune Paulos wrote in his dissertation 1988 from Prinston Theological seminary
http://www.medhanialemeotcks.org/pdf/Filsata.pdf
By the way, thanks for posting this, I also had lost it and was looking for it in regards to this thread Smiley

This is not merely a misunderstanding or linguistic mix up, there are indeed individuals within Ethiopian Orthodoxy, who have embraced the concepts of Immaculate Conception entirely on their own, and preach these from the pulpit, but HH Abune Paulos has condemned such activity vociferously.  The conflict in Ethiopia proper is that there also hundreds of thousands of Ethiopian Roman Catholics, who are under the Vatican, who practice the Latin rite in Ge'ez and perpetuate the confusion across the land.  

A lot of this confusion is more political than it is theological.



I have the impression that the Coptic Orthodox and the Armenian do not accept the Immaculate Conception.  As for the Ethiopian Orthodox we know that Bishop Matthias in the States believes it strongly enough to discipline a priest who rejected it.  Such a strong action on his part seems to indicate that he would have the backing of the Ethiopian hierarchy if the priest challenged him.



When it comes to ecclesiastic matters of the Ethiopian Church outside of Ethiopia, the Synod in Addis runs into quite a few logistical problems and as such it is not as strictly organized and in authority as say the Vatican.  Many Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Churches function relatively independent of the Patriarchate, receiving almost only nominal legitimacy from it, and HH Abune Paulos' reach is not so far as it might seem sometimes.  Even in Ethiopia itself, organization after the Derg has become a bit more loosely enforced then it was in years past.  

stay blessed,
habte selassie
« Last Edit: December 16, 2010, 06:46:14 PM by HabteSelassie » Logged

"Yet stand aloof from stupid questionings and geneologies and strifes and fightings about law, for they are without benefit and vain." Titus 3:10
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #74 on: December 16, 2010, 08:50:54 PM »

This is a reply to the PM I received requesting me to explain whether the majority of Tewahido believers accept the fact that the Mother of God is free from original sin.

Here, in Ethiopia, almost all of Tewahido believers accept the official position of the Holy Synod of the Tewahido church which says that the Blessed Virgin Mary is free from original sin. This official position is indicated in the Holy Synod’s published document titled “The Doctrine and Foreign Relations of the EOTC”. This document has boldly asserted that the Tewahido church believes that the Blessed Virgin Mary, Mother of God, is free from original sin.

In Addis Ababa and in all the regions of Ethiopia that I have been so far, I have never heard of a bishop or a priest or a Tewahido preacher doubting this position. But, of course, as I have mentioned in my earlier post there are very few individuals who question this position. I believe that these individuals are entitled to their own position and that they should not try to present their arguments as the official position of the EOTC. What we do mind is the official position of our church and NOT what individuals write in their personal articles or dissertations or whatever.

Therefore, we believe that our Blessed Virgin Mother Mary, Mother of God is free from original sin and that St. Gabriel was sent to Her NOT to cleanse Her from original sin BUT to tell Her the good news.  St. Gabriel himself has referred to Her as “full of grace”. Nobody else was referred to as full of grace since the fall of Adam simply because original sin had rendered humanity sinner and devoid of grace. But our Blessed Virgin Mother Mary was born full of grace and free from original sin.

After all, She is the Mother of God.

Regards,

Hiywot


You refer a few times in this post to the Holy Theotokos as being free (in present tense) from original sin. Do you not realize that it is possible for her to be free from original sin now while not having been at her conception?
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #75 on: December 16, 2010, 09:04:10 PM »

Now, as I understand it, immaculate does not in this case mean conceived immaculate, i.e. without the taint of ancestral sin. The arguement goes, if Mary, why not the rest of our race?

Does the Ethiopian stance mean immaculate in the exact Roman Catholic or immaculate in the Eastern Orthodox sense. It seems to be the former according to the former poster or is their another interpretation?

Well, there are a number of possible responses to this:

1. There is the theory that the Theotokos was always without personal sin. In that sense, she could be said to have been immaculate because she never bore guilt. Her hypostasis was never tarnished by that reality.
2. Because of this theory, it also could be said that there was a certain (almost) certitude in her being completely and permanently cleansed of sin when the Holy Spirit overshadowed her. If an adult never committed personal sin before being purified of ancestral sin, it's highly likely that they will not commit personal sin after.
3. The purification of the Theotokos was quite unique. No one else had the Incarnate Logos physically dwelling within them. Thus, I think it is safe to say that her purification was really in a class of its own beyond ours.
4. Perhaps in some sense the rest of the Saints could be understood to be immaculate. Obviously they are not Glorified Saints in Paradise and sinning still. But this reasoning cannot be applied to anyone else because our final redemption status has not yet been revealed.
5. Also, perhaps in some sense it could be said that those who are in a redeemed state via reception of the Sacred Mysteries could be said to be immaculate, though obviously this is the lowest sense that this term could be used.
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #76 on: December 16, 2010, 09:10:21 PM »

From the first page, I understood that the Ethiopian Church shared the Eastern Orthodox view of 'ancestral stain' instead of the Western idea of 'original sin', meaning the dogma of Immaculate Conception was irrelevant.

That is a very common myth and nothing more. The Western doctrine of "original sin" is not something entirely different from the Eastern "ancestral sin". It would appear that the West essentially takes "ancestral sin" and adds a few elements onto it to create their own doctrine. If you really read the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception, it does not state only that Mary was conceived free of "guilt" or "stain", but rather that she was born in perfect communion with God, with the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, and in a state not lacking in sanctity. As such, essentially it dictates that Mary was conceived even without "ancestral sin". Even if we ignore the matter of the difference between our understandings of "ancestral sin", we still differ as to whether she was born with the qualities pertaining to the Eastern doctrine.
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #77 on: December 16, 2010, 09:11:46 PM »

To be quite frank, the topic of Original Sin to me is a game on semantics.  Nevertheless, in the tradition of the OO Church, we follow quite strictly the language of Soteriology used by St. Athanasius, which was repeated by St. Cyril and St. Severus.

http://erkohet.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=103:blazingdartsfromtheorient&catid=46:smnufathersgeneral&Itemid=17#Anthropology

So when you see terminology like "Original Sin" used by us, know in the context it refers to a fall from grace, not an actual sin or guilt transmitted from one generation to the next.

God bless.

The only issue I take to this is that the mere condition of falling from grace could qualify the translation of sin as "missing the mark".
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 12,976


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


« Reply #78 on: December 16, 2010, 09:16:45 PM »

It seems like we have a variety of views from within the Ethiopian Church.  And it seems we have differing views from within the Armenian Church.

The Coptic Church celebrates the Theotokos' conception and birth.  We also celebrate the Forerunner's conception and birth.  We place these two saints in very high honor in the Church.  It's a shame we don't have much to say for the Forerunner, even though he too is immaculate and undefiled.

I wonder what the Syrian Church says?
Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for "unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain." (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 12,976


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


« Reply #79 on: December 16, 2010, 09:18:24 PM »

To be quite frank, the topic of Original Sin to me is a game on semantics.  Nevertheless, in the tradition of the OO Church, we follow quite strictly the language of Soteriology used by St. Athanasius, which was repeated by St. Cyril and St. Severus.

http://erkohet.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=103:blazingdartsfromtheorient&catid=46:smnufathersgeneral&Itemid=17#Anthropology

So when you see terminology like "Original Sin" used by us, know in the context it refers to a fall from grace, not an actual sin or guilt transmitted from one generation to the next.

God bless.

The only issue I take to this is that the mere condition of falling from grace could qualify the translation of sin as "missing the mark".

I have to admit, I just need to read more to study this.  But if I was to look at from my vantage point so far from what I learned, we are technically "not on the mark" when we're fallen from grace.
« Last Edit: December 16, 2010, 09:18:43 PM by minasoliman » Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for "unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain." (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #80 on: December 16, 2010, 09:22:20 PM »

To be quite frank, the topic of Original Sin to me is a game on semantics.  Nevertheless, in the tradition of the OO Church, we follow quite strictly the language of Soteriology used by St. Athanasius, which was repeated by St. Cyril and St. Severus.

http://erkohet.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=103:blazingdartsfromtheorient&catid=46:smnufathersgeneral&Itemid=17#Anthropology

So when you see terminology like "Original Sin" used by us, know in the context it refers to a fall from grace, not an actual sin or guilt transmitted from one generation to the next.

God bless.

The only issue I take to this is that the mere condition of falling from grace could qualify the translation of sin as "missing the mark".

I have to admit, I just need to read more to study this.  But if I was to look at from my vantage point so far from what I learned, we are technically "not on the mark" when we're fallen from grace.

Yes. That's what I was saying. And the point of me pointing that out is that "original sin" for us does qualify as actual sin, because we have truly missed the mark in the condition of our existence from our very conception (not, obviously, of our will, however).
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
Salpy
Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Armenian Church
Posts: 12,896


Pray for the Christians of Iraq and Syria.


« Reply #81 on: December 16, 2010, 10:46:15 PM »


Dear Sister in Christ, Salpy:

There are a lot of contradictory statements made by those who just want to paint with broad strokes and sweeping generalizations.  I offer the following quotes from Armenian Orthodox sources to serve as a balance to the one above.  I myself did a study on this question which discusses the similarities and differences between Catholics and Orthodox and tries to get at the real difference between us.

In the book "The Mother of God," by the Armenian Apostolic Vartabed Vatche Iknadiossian, he states, "the dogma of the Immaculate Conception, officially proclaimed by the Roman Catholic Church in 1854, was not officially proclaimed by our Church. Nevertheless we celebrate it as a very great feast, on 9th December (instead of 8th).  During the feast we find the following hymns:

I guess our Church leaders need to get together and really study and figure out exactly what our Church's Tradition teaches, as opposed to what may have crept in as a result of contact with the West.  One problem, which I think Fr. Peter mentions, is that there are terms which are understood to mean different things to different people.  Regarding the feast on Dec. 9, I've never heard or seen it referred to in the Armenian Church as the Feast of the Immaculate Conception.  I've heard it referred to a few different ways, such as the Feast of the Conception of the Virgin Mary by St. Anna, or the Feast of the Conception of the Holy Mother of God, or the Feast of the Conception of the Holy Virgin Mary, etc.  However, the word Immaculate is never used.

Again quoting the Eastern Diocese, let me paste the following from their website:

Quote
Although Mary was born naturally, she is considered morally pure and immaculate. It is for this reason that the church celebrates not only her birth, but also her conception, which the Armenian and the Greek Orthodox churches observe on December 9, and the Roman Catholic Church celebrates on December 8.

The concept of Mary's moral purity later developed into the question of her Immaculate Conception (from Anna), a doctrine adopted by the Roman Catholic Church in 1854. The Armenian Church, however, does not accept this, as only Christ was immaculately conceived.

However, Mary's purity is unquestioned. According to the teachings of the Armenian Church, at the time of the Annunciation, when the Holy Spirit entered Mary, she was cleansed of all original sin, as she was to be the vessel in which God manifest was to be incarnated.


http://www.armenianchurch-ed.net/feasts/annunciation/about-mary/


Logged

Ghazar
Byzantine Armenian Christian
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 215


"Ghazaros, toors yegoor:" "Lazarus, come forth."


WWW
« Reply #82 on: December 18, 2010, 05:21:16 AM »

In regards to Our Lady's nature: does our EOTC Church teach the same doctrine as all other non-Chalcedonian Churches regarding her being born without original sin?

In the book Welcome to the Armenian Church, published by the Eastern Diocese of the Armenian Church in America in 2004, it states that the teaching that the Virgin Mary "is considered to have been conceived immaculately without sin" is not a teaching of the Armenian Church. (page 39)

http://www.stvartanbookstore.com/index.asp?PageAction=VIEWPROD&ProdID=5247

Another source which confirms this is an article about the Mother of God on the website of the Armenian Eastern Diocese:

http://www.armenianchurch.net/worship/mary/index.html


In the 5th century, at the holy Ecumenical Council of Ephesus, the Holy Mother's position as "Mother of God" and "Bearer of God" (Asdvadzamayr-Asdvadzadzin) was doctrinally established.  Only those aspects of St. Mary's life which are directly related to Christ are mentioned in the Holy Gospels.  The remainder of her biography is attributed to tradition, which is found in much of the most ancient of ecclesiastical literature.

St. Mary was the daughter of Joachim and Anna of Nazareth (originally Bethlehem).  Anna, being barren, prayed and made special vows for a child.  She then had her only child, a daughter named Mariam (or Mary).  Although Mary was born naturally (having both a father and mother) she is considered morally pure and immaculate.  It is for this reason that the church not only celebrates her birth but also her conception, which the Armenian and the Greek Orthodox churches celebrate on December 9th and the Roman Catholic church celebrates on the 8th.

The concept of her being morally immaculate later developed into the question of her Immaculate Conception (from Anna), a doctrine adopted by the Roman Catholic Church in 1854.  The Armenian Church, on the other hand, does not accept this, as it attributes to Mary that which belongs only to Christ; only Christ was immaculately conceived.  Yet, her purity is unquestioned.  According to the teaching of the Armenian Church, at the time of the Annunciation when the Holy Spirit entered her she was cleansed of all sin (original sin) as she was to be the vessel in which God manifest was to be incarnated.

After the Ascension of her divine son, the remainder of Mary's life comes to us through tradition.  It states she lived out the rest of her days in Jerusalem, cared for by St. John the Evangelist.  She died in Jerusalem some 15 years after Christ's Ascension and was buried in her family tomb in Gethsemane.

After she passed away, all the apostles -- save Bartholomew who was absent at that time -- conducted her funeral with great ceremony at a cave-like tomb in the Garden of Gethsemane.  Later, St. Bartholomew returned and wished to see Mary one last time.  He convinced the Apostles to open the tomb.

Upon opening the tomb, they could not find her body.  Angels' voices were heard for three days and nights.  They interpreted the angels' singing as a sign that our Lord had assumed (taken up) His Mother into heaven as He had promised her.  They found the empty tomb a confirmation of that promise for she had not been dead but had fallen asleep.  For this reason, the church refers to the end of her earthly life as "the dormition" rather than "death."

 




Dear Sister in Christ, Salpy:

Thank you for sharing this site.  That is a precise example of what I was referring to.  To me it is very illogical.  First the article affirms that St. Mary was "conceived morally pure and immaculate" and this is the reason why we celebrate this feast with the Greek and Latins.  Then immediately after this, the article denies what it just affirmed: that St. Mary was conceived immaculate.  What reason does it give for this apparent self-contradiction?  Becasue:  "this only belongs to Christ our God."  The question then becomes what does this writer think is meant by "Immaculate Conception" that it only belongs to Christ our God?  This contradiction makes the writer appear like he doesn’t really know what is meant by this.  This is why I take time to explain this at length in my essay. 

There are both similarities and differences between Catholics and Orthodox.  The point of my essay was to get at the heart of these -which no one else seems to want to do.  Most just want to paint things with broad strokes and silly generalizations without getting to the honest truth and heart of the matter.  I understand its much easier that way.  But this doesn't help those in our Churches who really want to understand -and that's very sad.

I think our feast of the Conception of the Immaculate Virgin Mary boils bown to this:  God's ELECTION of St. Mary from the moment she was conceived.  This is the point of not only celebrating her life, not only celebrating her Divine Maternity of our Lord, not only celebrating the Annunciation when she said "yes" to God, not only celebrating her BIRTH from St. Anna... but even of celebrating the moment of her CONCEPTION (which we do every year on Dec. 9th)!  At her conception she had not yet believed in Christ... she had not yet done one good thing... yet she was already sanctified, set aside and glorified by God Himself.  This is the true meaning of the Feast of her Conception as our liturgical texts clearly bear out (if others are willing to look at them and honestly deal with them devoid of knee-jerk anti-catholic bias).

I tend to get a little passionate about what I consider to be irrational arguments and false distinctions.  Sorry about that.  When all is said in done, I know it is all in Christ's hands.  I just pray for the day such silly things are not said and serious discussion is offered instead.

Trusting in Christ's 1st and 2nd Advent,
Rev. Sub-Deacon Lazarus W. Der-Ghazarian,
Holy Apostolic Orthodox Church of Armenia, Eastern Diocese USA
The Armenian Orthodox Evangelization Mission: www.looys.net
« Last Edit: December 18, 2010, 05:25:10 AM by Ghazar » Logged

Trusting in Christ's Inextinguishable Light,
Rev. Sub-Deacon Lazarus Der-Ghazarian,
Byzantine Catholic Church, Eparchy of Parma
St. Gregory the Illuminator Institute:
www.looys.net
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 12,976


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


« Reply #83 on: December 18, 2010, 05:29:11 AM »

Dear Subdeacon Lazarus,

I don't think anyone will disagree that she was sanctified.  This isn't the first time when someone being conceived or born was sanctified by God, but to be immaculately conceived is quite unheard of, at least in the Coptic Church.  It could be, as Fr. Peter said, we use terms that mean something different from our brothers the Catholics.
Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for "unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain." (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
Ghazar
Byzantine Armenian Christian
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 215


"Ghazaros, toors yegoor:" "Lazarus, come forth."


WWW
« Reply #84 on: December 18, 2010, 05:36:12 AM »

Salpy writes:  "Regarding the feast on Dec. 9, I've never heard or seen it referred to in the Armenian Church as the Feast of the Immaculate Conception.  I've heard it referred to a few different ways, such as the Feast of the Conception of the Virgin Mary by St. Anna, or the Feast of the Conception of the Holy Mother of God, or the Feast of the Conception of the Holy Virgin Mary, etc.  However, the word Immaculate is never used."

Dear Sister in Christ:  You are correct about the title of the Feast.  I discuss this also in my essay.  Besides what I state there we must note that the word "immaculate" ("anarad" in Armenian) although not used in the title of this feast, next to "Asdvadzadzeen" (Bearer of God) is probably our most used title for St. Mariam in all of our liturgical texts including the very first litanies of the Divine Liturgy.  So it is well established, but I would not refer to the feast as the Feast of the Immaculate Conception for the reasons I give in the essay.  Conception of the Immaculate Virgin would be much more in line with our tradition.  Thank you and God bless you.
Logged

Trusting in Christ's Inextinguishable Light,
Rev. Sub-Deacon Lazarus Der-Ghazarian,
Byzantine Catholic Church, Eparchy of Parma
St. Gregory the Illuminator Institute:
www.looys.net
Ghazar
Byzantine Armenian Christian
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 215


"Ghazaros, toors yegoor:" "Lazarus, come forth."


WWW
« Reply #85 on: December 18, 2010, 05:45:48 AM »

minasoliman:

Quite true she is not the only one to be sanctified in the womb.  I can't speak to the Coptic tradition but there is absolutely no comparison with the way our liturgy speaks abour her Conception (and how God prepared her to be  Bearer of God) compared to that of these others who were sanctified at conception or in the womb (e.g. St. Jeremiah the Prophet, St. John the Forerunner).  For me to pretend that these sanctifications are on the same level would be a falsification and a betrayl of our Lex Orandi.  All I am saying is that I think a lot of Orthodox, for fear of sounding Catholic, are down playing what our liturgy really teaches and I don't think we need to operate that way.  There are differences between us for sure.  I invite all to begin fleshing out what these differences are.  I've given it my best shot in the study I did on the subject.  I encourage others to do the same.

Sub-Deacon Lazarus
Logged

Trusting in Christ's Inextinguishable Light,
Rev. Sub-Deacon Lazarus Der-Ghazarian,
Byzantine Catholic Church, Eparchy of Parma
St. Gregory the Illuminator Institute:
www.looys.net
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #86 on: December 18, 2010, 07:13:27 AM »

In regards to Our Lady's nature: does our EOTC Church teach the same doctrine as all other non-Chalcedonian Churches regarding her being born without original sin?

In the book Welcome to the Armenian Church, published by the Eastern Diocese of the Armenian Church in America in 2004, it states that the teaching that the Virgin Mary "is considered to have been conceived immaculately without sin" is not a teaching of the Armenian Church. (page 39)

http://www.stvartanbookstore.com/index.asp?PageAction=VIEWPROD&ProdID=5247

Another source which confirms this is an article about the Mother of God on the website of the Armenian Eastern Diocese:

http://www.armenianchurch.net/worship/mary/index.html


In the 5th century, at the holy Ecumenical Council of Ephesus, the Holy Mother's position as "Mother of God" and "Bearer of God" (Asdvadzamayr-Asdvadzadzin) was doctrinally established.  Only those aspects of St. Mary's life which are directly related to Christ are mentioned in the Holy Gospels.  The remainder of her biography is attributed to tradition, which is found in much of the most ancient of ecclesiastical literature.

St. Mary was the daughter of Joachim and Anna of Nazareth (originally Bethlehem).  Anna, being barren, prayed and made special vows for a child.  She then had her only child, a daughter named Mariam (or Mary).  Although Mary was born naturally (having both a father and mother) she is considered morally pure and immaculate.  It is for this reason that the church not only celebrates her birth but also her conception, which the Armenian and the Greek Orthodox churches celebrate on December 9th and the Roman Catholic church celebrates on the 8th.

The concept of her being morally immaculate later developed into the question of her Immaculate Conception (from Anna), a doctrine adopted by the Roman Catholic Church in 1854.  The Armenian Church, on the other hand, does not accept this, as it attributes to Mary that which belongs only to Christ; only Christ was immaculately conceived.  Yet, her purity is unquestioned.  According to the teaching of the Armenian Church, at the time of the Annunciation when the Holy Spirit entered her she was cleansed of all sin (original sin) as she was to be the vessel in which God manifest was to be incarnated.

After the Ascension of her divine son, the remainder of Mary's life comes to us through tradition.  It states she lived out the rest of her days in Jerusalem, cared for by St. John the Evangelist.  She died in Jerusalem some 15 years after Christ's Ascension and was buried in her family tomb in Gethsemane.

After she passed away, all the apostles -- save Bartholomew who was absent at that time -- conducted her funeral with great ceremony at a cave-like tomb in the Garden of Gethsemane.  Later, St. Bartholomew returned and wished to see Mary one last time.  He convinced the Apostles to open the tomb.

Upon opening the tomb, they could not find her body.  Angels' voices were heard for three days and nights.  They interpreted the angels' singing as a sign that our Lord had assumed (taken up) His Mother into heaven as He had promised her.  They found the empty tomb a confirmation of that promise for she had not been dead but had fallen asleep.  For this reason, the church refers to the end of her earthly life as "the dormition" rather than "death."

 




Dear Sister in Christ, Salpy:

Thank you for sharing this site.  That is a precise example of what I was referring to.  To me it is very illogical.  First the article affirms that St. Mary was "conceived morally pure and immaculate" and this is the reason why we celebrate this feast with the Greek and Latins.  Then immediately after this, the article denies what it just affirmed: that St. Mary was conceived immaculate.  What reason does it give for this apparent self-contradiction?  Becasue:  "this only belongs to Christ our God."  The question then becomes what does this writer think is meant by "Immaculate Conception" that it only belongs to Christ our God?  This contradiction makes the writer appear like he doesn’t really know what is meant by this.  This is why I take time to explain this at length in my essay. 

There are both similarities and differences between Catholics and Orthodox.  The point of my essay was to get at the heart of these -which no one else seems to want to do.  Most just want to paint things with broad strokes and silly generalizations without getting to the honest truth and heart of the matter.  I understand its much easier that way.  But this doesn't help those in our Churches who really want to understand -and that's very sad.

I think our feast of the Conception of the Immaculate Virgin Mary boils bown to this:  God's ELECTION of St. Mary from the moment she was conceived.  This is the point of not only celebrating her life, not only celebrating her Divine Maternity of our Lord, not only celebrating the Annunciation when she said "yes" to God, not only celebrating her BIRTH from St. Anna... but even of celebrating the moment of her CONCEPTION (which we do every year on Dec. 9th)!  At her conception she had not yet believed in Christ... she had not yet done one good thing... yet she was already sanctified, set aside and glorified by God Himself.  This is the true meaning of the Feast of her Conception as our liturgical texts clearly bear out (if others are willing to look at them and honestly deal with them devoid of knee-jerk anti-catholic bias).

I tend to get a little passionate about what I consider to be irrational arguments and false distinctions.  Sorry about that.  When all is said in done, I know it is all in Christ's hands.  I just pray for the day such silly things are not said and serious discussion is offered instead.

Trusting in Christ's 1st and 2nd Advent,
Rev. Sub-Deacon Lazarus W. Der-Ghazarian,
Holy Apostolic Orthodox Church of Armenia, Eastern Diocese USA
The Armenian Orthodox Evangelization Mission: www.looys.net


Unfortunately, I am at a loss about this among the OO, for the simple reason that no one celebrates this Feast as a major Feast, and so the precedent of lex orandi simply isn't there: I dare say most Orthodox, OO and EO, are unaware that the calendar marks the Feast. So for the sake of argument I stand on the statement:
Quote
Armenians inherited the Feast of the Conception of the Theotokos (and even the dating of its celebration on Dec. 9th) from Byzantine (a.k.a., Eastern Roman) Orthodox. The Armenian Church has no liturgical texts composed for this day to elucidate the feast’s meaning via our “Lex Orandi.” Therefore we must consult the Byzantine Liturgical texts in order to make sense of why our Fathers adopted the feast. After all, there must have been something which rang true concerning this feast which convinced our Fathers that we too should celebrate it.
as I do know the issue among the EO.

This sounds fine
Quote
.  In the Eastern Church original sin had never played the same preponderant part as in post-Augustinian Western thought.  From very early times it had been assumed as an indisputable fact that Mary was the purest creature imaginable, the highest angels not excepted.  St. John of Damascus had even considered her active conception to have been without sin, but as he did not share the Augustinian view of original sin as an inherited guilt transmitted through the sexual act, the problem never presented itself to him in the way it did to Latin theologians.  For the Eastern Fathers saw original sin far more as mortality with all its implications, and as the Theotokos was subject to this, they did not exempt her from it.  On the other hand, though they affirmed Mary's complete purity, they were less interested than the Western theologians in the question of the precise moment when this had been established.  We might almost say that the Latins considered the question from the historical, the Eastern Fathers from the metaphysical, point of view; the former were concerned about when this purity had begun, the latter were only interested in the fact that it existed.  For this reason I do not think one can claim these Eastern authors for the Immaculate Conception.” [2]

Thus the Latin feast of the “Immaculate Conception” focuses primarily on the moment of St. Mariam’s conception as immaculate -and the defining of what exactly this means in the Latin theological tradition.  Orthodox theoloy focuses rather on her person as immaculate.  Hence, we would be more likely to refer to the feast as the “Conception of the Immaculate Virgin,” rather than the “Immaculate Conception.”  As Graef points out, whereas the East focuses on her metaphysical purity, the Latin’s focus more on the exact moment of her reception of that purity.  Whereas Latin Catholics celebrate the dogmatization of “the moment,” Orthodox maintain the primitive emphasis on “the fact” of her purity and celebrate this feast recalling all the historical events surrounding St. Mariam’s conception from her parents Sts. Joachim and Anna. [3]
but one woul have to distinguish it from the position of Duns Scotus
Quote
The famous Duns Scotus (d. 1308) at last (in III Sent., dist. iii, in both commentaries) laid the foundations of the true doctrine so solidly and dispelled the objections in a manner so satisfactory, that from that time onward the doctrine prevailed. He showed that the sanctification after animation — sanctificatio post animationem — demanded that it should follow in the order of nature (naturae) not of time (temporis); he removed the great difficulty of St. Thomas showing that, so far from being excluded from redemption, the Blessed Virgin obtained of her Divine Son the greatest of redemptions through the mystery of her preservation from all sin. He also brought forward, by way of illustration, the somewhat dangerous and doubtful argument of Eadmer (S. Anselm) "decuit, potuit, ergo fecit."
which led the Vatican astray. The same article takes up the lex orandi of the Orthodox
Quote
The older feast of the Conception of Mary (Conception of St. Anne), which originated in the monasteries of Palestine at least as early as the seventh century, and the modern feast of the Immaculate Conception are not identical in their object.

Originally the Church celebrated only the Feast of the Conception of Mary, as she kept the Feast of St. John's conception, not discussing the sinlessness. This feast in the course of centuries became the Feast of the Immaculate Conception, as dogmatical argumentation brought about precise and correct ideas, and as the thesis of the theological schools regarding the preservation of Mary from all stain of original sin gained strength. Even after the dogma had been universally accepted in the Latin Church, and had gained authoritative support through diocesan decrees and papal decisions, the old term remained, and before 1854 the term "Immaculata Conceptio" is nowhere found in the liturgical books, except in the invitatorium of the Votive Office of the Conception. The Greeks, Syrians, etc. call it the Conception of St. Anne (Eullepsis tes hagias kai theoprometoros Annas, "the Conception of St. Anne, the ancestress of God").

Passaglia in his "De Immaculato Deiparae Conceptu," basing his opinion upon the "Typicon" of St. Sabas: which was substantially composed in the fifth century, believes that the reference to the feast forms part of the authentic original, and that consequently it was celebrated in the Patriarchate of Jerusalem in the fifth century (III, n. 1604). But the Typicon was interpolated by the Damascene, Sophronius, and others, and, from the ninth to the twelfth centuries, many new feasts and offices were added.

To determine the origin of this feast we must take into account the genuine documents we possess, the oldest of which is the canon of the feast, composed by St. Andrew of Crete, who wrote his liturgical hymns in the second half of the seventh century, when a monk at the monastery of St. Sabas near Jerusalem (d. Archbishop of Crete about 720). But the solemnity cannot then have been generally accepted throughout the Orient, for John, first monk and later bishop in the Isle of Euboea, about 750 in a sermon, speaking in favour of the propagation of this feast, says that it was not yet known to all the faithful (ei kai me para tois pasi gnorizetai; P.G., XCVI, 1499). But a century later George of Nicomedia, made metropolitan by Photius in 860, could say that the solemnity was not of recent origin (P.G., C, 1335). It is therefore, safe to affirm that the feast of the Conception of St. Anne appears in the Orient not earlier than the end of the seventh or the beginning of the eighth century.

As in other cases of the same kind the feast originated in the monastic communities. The monks, who arranged the psalmody and composed the various poetical pieces for the office, also selected the date, 9 December, which was always retained in the Oriental calendars. Gradually the solemnity emerged from the cloister, entered into the cathedrals, was glorified by preachers and poets, and eventually became a fixed feast of the calendar, approved by Church and State.

It is registered in the calendar of Basil II (976-1025) and by the Constitution of Emperor Manuel I Comnenus on the days of the year which are half or entire holidays, promulgated in 1166, it is numbered among the days which have full sabbath rest. Up to the time of Basil II, Lower Italy, Sicily, and Sardinia still belonged to the Byzantine Empire; the city of Naples was not lost to the Greeks until 1127, when Roger II conquered the city. The influence of Constantinople was consequently strong in the Neapolitan Church, and, as early as the ninth century, the Feast of the Conception was doubtlessly kept there, as elsewhere in Lower Italy on 9 December, as indeed appears from the marble calendar found in 1742 in the Church of S. Giorgio Maggiore at Naples.

Today the Conception of St. Anne is in the Greek Church one of the minor feasts of the year. The lesson in Matins contains allusions to the apocryphal "Proto-evangelium" of St. James, which dates from the second half of the second century (see SAINT ANNE). To the Greek Orthodox of our days, however, the feast means very little; they continue to call it "Conception of St. Anne", indicating unintentionally, perhaps, the active conception which was certainly not immaculate. In the Menaea of 9 December this feast holds only the second place, the first canon being sung in commemoration of the dedication of the Church of the Resurrection at Constantinople. The Russian hagiographer Muraview and several other Orthodox authors even loudly declaimed against the dogma after its promulgation, although their own preachers formerly taught the Immaculate Conception in their writings long before the definition of 1854.
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07674d.htm
The latter assertion often repeated but never cited.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Ghazar
Byzantine Armenian Christian
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 215


"Ghazaros, toors yegoor:" "Lazarus, come forth."


WWW
« Reply #87 on: December 18, 2010, 10:37:45 AM »

Dear Ialmisry:  Thank you for that helpful article.  Could you give me a reference for that?

You stated:  "Unfortunately, I am at a loss about this among the OO, for the simple reason that no one celebrates this Feast as a major Feast, and so the precedent of lex orandi simply isn't there: I dare say most Orthodox, OO and EO, are unaware that the calendar marks the Feast."

Reply:  This is true.  I don't believe I ever claimed it was a major feast.  But it is a feast just the same and therefore (I would think) has a meaning and significance which should be made intelligible to our faithful, whether they are aware of it or not.  There are apparently some Armenian hymns used at this feast (as referenced earlier by Vartabed Iknadiossian).  I suspect they weren't specifically written for the feast though.  But I am referring to our entire body of Mariological texts contained in our Lex Orandi, since these are necessary to get a full and proper understanding of our teaching on the Theotokos.

You said:  But one would have to distinguish it from the position of Duns Scotus.

Reply:  I don't see how any Byzantine or Armenian Orthodox Christian can deny, based on our Lex Orandi, the concept that God prepared St. Mary -in some way- from the time of her Conception for her role as Bearer of God.  I'm sure we would not define what exactly that preparation was (and here lies a difference between East and West).  But any such preparation has to be based on the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, does it not?  We may not use the language of "merits" but certainly such a preparation would be dependent upon Grace and that Grace would have to come from her Son, would it not?  I would never sign on to Duns Scotus' definition, but I will not deny the above just because of it.  Would any of you?

I agree that it is important to point out to our Latin brethren (as I recently did to a Catholic theologian I know) that we also have a feast of the Holy Forerunner's Conception.  This is significant in finding balance and meaning.  But as I just wrote a few hours ago, the texts about the Mother of God in our Lex Orandi (as demonstrated by others in this thread) go far beyond what is stated about the Forerunner's Concpetion.  For balance and meaning we must recognize this also.  Afterall, we would expect this (wouldn't we?) being that our Blesed Mother's role went far beyond that of the Forerunner (didn't it?).

God bless you all...
« Last Edit: December 18, 2010, 10:49:52 AM by Ghazar » Logged

Trusting in Christ's Inextinguishable Light,
Rev. Sub-Deacon Lazarus Der-Ghazarian,
Byzantine Catholic Church, Eparchy of Parma
St. Gregory the Illuminator Institute:
www.looys.net
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #88 on: December 18, 2010, 12:08:27 PM »

Dear Ialmisry:  Thank you for that helpful article.  Could you give me a reference for that?
Quote
APA citation. Holweck, F. (1910). Immaculate Conception. In The Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company. Retrieved December 18, 2010 from New Advent: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07674d.htm

MLA citation. Holweck, Frederick. "Immaculate Conception." The Catholic Encyclopedia. Vol. 7. New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1910. 18 Dec. 2010 <http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07674d.htm>.


Ecclesiastical approbation. Nihil Obstat. June 1, 1910. Remy Lafort, S.T.D., Censor. Imprimatur. +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York.

It is what the link goes to.

Quote
You stated:  "Unfortunately, I am at a loss about this among the OO, for the simple reason that no one celebrates this Feast as a major Feast, and so the precedent of lex orandi simply isn't there: I dare say most Orthodox, OO and EO, are unaware that the calendar marks the Feast."

Reply:  This is true.  I don't believe I ever claimed it was a major feast.  But it is a feast just the same and therefore (I would think) has a meaning and significance which should be made intelligible to our faithful, whether they are aware of it or not.

That it is not a major Feast goes directly to the propriety of elevating a definition of what "All-Holy" and "Most Pure" means to a dogmatic stance.  This is underlined by the fact that both the Nativity and Presentation into the Temple of All-Holy and Most Pure Theotokos, and "as the fact of the "Presentation of the Blessed Virgin Mary" is only a pious belief, but not a defined matter of faith, it was suppressed by Pope Pius V in 1568" ("The Saint Andrew Missal, with Sundays and Feasts," p. 1684). It is also interesting in this context how the Presentation of the Lord in the Temple was changed to Purification of the Blessed Virgin Mary. On that basis, given the emphasis on the Annuciation, the Nativity and Presentation of the Theotokos, and relative obscurity of the Conception of St. Anne-the name itself de-emphasizing it as a basis on which to examin the beginnings of her All-Holiness and Most-Purity-taking a back seat to the dedication of the Church of the Resurrection, coupled with the emphasis on her Dormition, as opposed to her Assumption, we must speak against what is the core of the Vatican's dogma of the IC.

Quote
There are apparently some Armenian hymns used at this feast (as referenced earlier by Vartabed Iknadiossian).  I suspect they weren't specifically written for the feast though.  But I am referring to our entire body of Mariological texts contained in our Lex Orandi, since these are necessary to get a full and proper understanding of our teaching on the Theotokos.

I am rather suprised by some of the lyrics of the hymn, at least as translated. That they may have not been composed for the feast, that they were adopted for the Feast by the Armenian Church, and the lack of corresponding hymns in the Orthodox Churches, particularly for the feast, all have a bearing on what the lex credendi can derive from this facts.

Quote
You said:  But one would have to distinguish it from the position of Duns Scotus.

Reply:  I don't see how any Byzantine or Armenian Orthodox Christian can deny, based on our Lex Orandi, the concept that God prepared St. Mary -in some way- from the time of her Conception for her role as Bearer of God.  I'm sure we would not define what exactly that preparation was (and here lies a difference between East and West).  But any such preparation has to be based on the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, does it not?  We may not use the language of "merits" but certainly such a preparation would be dependent upon Grace and that Grace would have to come from her Son, would it not?  I would never sign on to Duns Scotus' definition, but I will not deny the above just because of it.  Would any of you?

Since the First Adam was created with the coming of the Second Adam in mind, this is all relative speculation.

Quote
I agree that it is important to point out to our Latin brethren (as I recently did to a Catholic theologian I know) that we also have a feast of the Holy Forerunner's Conception.  This is significant in finding balance and meaning.  But as I just wrote a few hours ago, the texts about the Mother of God in our Lex Orandi (as demonstrated by others in this thread) go far beyond what is stated about the Forerunner's Concpetion.  For balance and meaning we must recognize this also.  Afterall, we would expect this (wouldn't we?) being that our Blesed Mother's role went far beyond that of the Forerunner (didn't it?).

God bless you all...
Not only the Forerunner's Conception, but the Fact of the Annunciation, i.e. the Lord's Conception, being the main Feast of the Theotokos is also telling.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 12,976


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


« Reply #89 on: December 18, 2010, 01:34:15 PM »

In the Coptic Church, we acknowledge the purity of both the Theotokos and the Forerunner equally, but we sing more about the Theotokos than the Forerunner because she is the Mother of God, not necessarily because she is purer than the Forerunner.  In the Synexarium, it is written about St. John:

Quote
The life of this Saint was like that of the angels in purity. He was filled with the Holy Spirit while he was in his mother's womb, and was martyred for his witnessing to the truth.

Maybe the sanctification of the Theotokos to be the Mother of God probably might be different than the sanctification of St. John in being the Forerunner, or as St. Jacob Baradeous calls him, "the Voice of God."  But the purity ascribed to both them seems to be the same.

An immaculate conception might be understood probably as a conception with the sanctification of the Holy Spirit, but not a conception perhaps that lifts the curse of Adam.  We even allude to the purity of the Virgin Mary probably because of the purity of her own mother:

Quote
On this day, the pious and righteous St. Anna (Hannah), the mother of our Lady, the holy virgin St. Mary, the Mother of God, departed. This holy woman was the daughter of Matthan, the son of Levi, the son of Melki, who was a descendant of Aaron the priest. Her mother's name was Mary (Mariam) and she was from the tribe of Judah.
...

Although we know little about St. Anna, having been chosen to be the mother of the Mother of God in the flesh is an indication of her virtues and righteousness, which distinguished her from other women to have this great grace.

Feasts of the parents of the Theotokos:
http://www.copticchurch.net/synaxarium/8_7.html#1
http://www.copticchurch.net/synaxarium/3_11.html#1

Feasts of the Theotokos (besides the 21st of every Coptic month):
http://www.copticchurch.net/synaxarium/12_7.html#1
http://www.copticchurch.net/synaxarium/9_1.html#1
http://www.copticchurch.net/synaxarium/4_3.html#1
http://www.copticchurch.net/synaxarium/5_21.html#1
http://www.copticchurch.net/synaxarium/12_16.html#1

Feasts of the parents of the Forerunner:
http://www.copticchurch.net/synaxarium/6_16.html#1
http://www.copticchurch.net/synaxarium/1_8.html#1

Feasts of the Forerunner (Besides the feast of the Theophany, although not directly for the Forerunner, we ask the intercessions of the Forerunner on this day as we commemorate him):
http://www.copticchurch.net/synaxarium/1_26.html#1
http://www.copticchurch.net/synaxarium/10_30.html#1
http://www.copticchurch.net/synaxarium/1_2.html#1
http://www.copticchurch.net/synaxarium/6_30.html#1
http://www.copticchurch.net/synaxarium/10_2.html#1

In my opinion, we should sing just as much for the Forerunner as the Theotokos.
« Last Edit: December 18, 2010, 01:36:08 PM by minasoliman » Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for "unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain." (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
Tags: Ethiopian Orthodox Church Immaculate Conception Theotokos Dormition Original Sin 
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 »  All   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.233 seconds with 72 queries.